On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Albert Y. C. Lai
This logic is flawed. More than 90% of computers having Windows doesn't imply that 90% of all computers in a given household runs Windows. What's the probability that your household has a Windows computer if you're a programmer that don't live with your parents? What if that programmer is an open source contributor. Surely not 90%. This counter-argument is flawed. Why limit oneself to one's own household? (Garage? Basement?) Get out more! Visit a friend. Talk to an internet cafe owner for a special deal to run one's own programs. Rent virtual machine time in the cloud. There are many creative, flexible, low-cost
On 12-11-20 08:20 PM, Johan Tibell wrote: possibilities.
The key word here is "low-cost". None of them are as low as the cost
of Linux, Solaris, *BSD, etc. Those are all free. There's even free VM
software available for them so you don't have to dedicate a machine to
it.
This actually makes the argument running in the other direction more
telling. It's less expensive for Windows users to get Unix/Linux than
Unix/Linux users to get Windows. If you want a Haskell environment to
work in, install VirtualBoxOSE (free) and a Linux distro (also free)
and work on that.
Of course, the real cost is that maintaining software that you aren't
using on a regular basis - which includes software you do use on a
platform you don't - is a PITA. Given that, why would anyone doing
something for free want to spend money for (access to a) copy of
Windows to build/test software they aren't going to use?